High Court Karnataka High Court

M/S. Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd vs The Joint Commissioner Of … on 29 June, 2009

Karnataka High Court
M/S. Kansai Nerolac Paints Ltd vs The Joint Commissioner Of … on 29 June, 2009
Author: Ajit J Gunjal
."g~.a

_  'if3Q§'$?:?'IT_ITU'I"§O1'~E OF' INIBEA, PRAYENG TS QUASH THE: IMPUGNED

 , 'C3§'2.2OCe9 PASSED BY THE 13?'
'RESPGFJDERT FOR THE ASSESSMENT PERIOD 2002-63, 2003-64

 "AME; 2G$4~{}F~« {ANNEXv~K,L AND M} HOLDING THE SAME AS
EREETRAR? AN?) VIOLATEVE OF' E-"E'§f'~IC1PLES OF' NfiTURAL-
"xjUS"i'iCE- ANQ ETC9,

IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT BANGAIEQORE
sum THIS 'mr.: 29TH mar or JUNE, 20:3:-9:'   -.

BEFORE:    '  T '

THE I-iGN"BLE MR. JUSTICE Mr!' , V

Writ Petz’t1’erm, 3570.554} 0}.” 250? «FT «K1S”1″} AV
sarrvrzns: * ”

M,/S. KANSAS NERQLAC PAIN’I1’$ L.TD”~ .
{PREVEQUSLY GOCJBLAS ”

NERQLAC PAINTS Lf’E’D.,§
Ma :9, }i§ESHNANAGAR
INE3US’?RIAL Lavemtfi, «.

HGSEJR ROAD, ' ' 

BANGALORE    L' ..  PETITIONEF:

Afvinii ‘;’v’a-‘.T1.ia:, for
_ I{a1.:1a1:h,,Adv.,]

L THE~J{§I’}!T ‘<::o;g:'r;2::'s~s'IIi%ER ‘
COf,4MERC§5€._; TAXES’ . . . _’
(ADpezAzNI–s*rRAT:Q’:xzAND’}::;5:<:":ovERY1 «- 2
L151 BU1L1*}£NG,.VN£f:§;E' 'S:':_M"I?'I{Z%E mag
BANGA£QREV ' A.=.I~ '

'{'%§_{E DEPUTY' £iQMMJS.SiONER or
__ ..:if;_{:~MME RCIAL 'I'AXE:–S
' «.{'E'PANSé'TECiN 4 :3
' §LA.KSHMIb'aCiGRd_PLEX,
.;8fis.NGfiL»Qf£'E;~._..~~ RESP€3ND£1i'~f'fS

V. K M Shivagmgiswamy, HCGPJ

'§'HiS PE}TE'I'IOZ'$ IS FILED SEER? ARFICLE 225 {IF THE

Ti-II€:'§ PEZTETEON COMING SN F0}? PREZJMINARY HEARING 'B'
GROUP, THIS DA? THEE €l€)TJR'T MAEE THE F'OLLOWING:–

19. It is not in dispute and it is not the Ca§:st~’;~

counsel for the petitioner that the said swzg».

powers are initiated before the ei;pi1*y..c)é1’_jvf<5!T1;* years,"-hut;}:}:1e

cudgei appears to he tf1at,iI'.'j:he 3

chosen not to exersise idez"1'IV"'.VLi;'<":.'.gVa'}' §)¢w$f' .§is:v.:co%}.te1np1ated
under section 21 of open for the
revisional powers of Eta exercise suo
mom powers, accepted having

regard to

20. After consideration I am of the
viaw that i:1 thé§”.’-set. djfcircumstances, €116 ixlitiatian
::,jii’V’.:~”:.2,_ao r’?i5m,.’pow’¢rs Lifidéry section 21 0f the Act carmot be

faiiltgedi ” ‘

21-, Coéfinsel for the getitioner submits that some

i x”na:;( Qfiflteéi to the petitioner to file an app-ea}

V “.V he:f£:er§§5’;.iiéATr’ib111*2a§.

10

22. Petitioner is ganted four weeks ~ an
aypeal. Needless to say that the Tribuna}

the question of iimgitation.

23. Writ petiticn is rejectefi”ag;c0I”diI1jgiy._

24. Sri. Shivayogiswéimyf, .t jGV€rflIfi€3§i;£ Pleader is
directed to F113 memo of four weeks.
V Sdlgg
A Judge

AN/~ _. ..